Cover not available
Article published In:
ITL - International Journal of Applied Linguistics
Vol. 174:2 (2023) ► pp.202–229

The acquisition of L2 Hungarian grammar rules and the implicit-explicit debate

ORCID logo | KU Leuven
| KU Leuven

This study contributes to the explicit implicit debate by investigating to which extent adult learners of Hungarian develop knowledge of new grammar rules, and the proficiency to use them, through listening activities complemented with explicit grammar instruction or not.

In a quasi-experimental study, we compared the acquisition of three specific rules of Hungarian grammar by 80 Flemish adult students in two conditions. Both methods involved listening activities, but in one condition explicit rule explanation and practice was given and in the other one, meaningful activities were created without grammar explanation. The findings indicate that for teaching simple rules, compared to more complex grammar features, listening activities and exposure to comprehensible input have a significantly positive effect on grammar acquisition at the basic level. The explicit condition did not have an added beneficial effect. Exposure to L2 is the main driver of language development.

Keywords: listening activities, acquiring typologically distant language, explicit instruction, input flooding, teaching grammar
Article outline
  • Introduction
  • Literature review
    • The explicit-implicit debate
    • Implicit grammar instruction
    • Simple vs complex grammar rules
    • Hungarian, the target language in this study
  • Research questions
  • Methodology
    • Study design
    • Participants
  • Materials
    • Target grammar rules
      • 1st rule: The use of van/vannak (the use of ‘is/are’)
      • 2nd rule: The use of definite and indefinite conjugation
      • 3rd rule: The combination of the preverbs fel-/le- (‘upwards/downwards’) with the suffixes -ra/-re (‘towards’) and -ról/-ről (‘from’)
    • Input flooding
    • Tests
      • Grammaticality judgement test (GJT): Did the participants notice the new rule?
      • Fill-in-the-gap task
      • Writing task
    • Pilot study
    • Procedure
    • Timing
    • Statistical analysis
  • Results
    • RQ1.Does providing language input via listening activities contribute to the acquisition of unfamiliar Hungarian grammar rules?
      • 1st rule: The use of van/vannak (the use of ‘is/are’)
      • 2nd rule: The use of definite and indefinite conjugation
      • 3rd rule: The combination of the preverbs fel-/le- (‘upwards/downwards’) with the suffixes -ra/-re (‘towards’) and -ról/-ről (‘from’)
    • RQ2.Does additional explicit rule explanation help in mastering the rules?
      • 1st rule: The use of van/vannak (the use of ‘is/are’)
      • 2nd rule: The use of definite and indefinite conjugation
      • 3rd rule: The combination of the preverbs fel-/le- (‘upwards/downwards’) with the suffixes -ra/-re (‘towards’) and -ról/-ről (‘from’)
  • Discussion
    • Does providing language input via listening activities contribute to the acquisition of unfamiliar grammar rules (RQ1)?
    • Does additional explicit rule explanation help in mastering the rules (RQ2)?
    • The effect of prior knowledge
    • Limitations
    • Pedagogical implications
  • Conclusions
  • Note
  • References
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) 4.0 license.

For any use beyond this license, please contact the publisher at [email protected].

Published online: 13 December 2022
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/itl.21038.ger
References
Bakró-Nagy, M., Lahdelma, T. & Maticsák, S.
(1999) Hungarologische Beitrage, Vol. 121.Google Scholar
Cohen, J.
(1988) Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed). L. Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
DeKeyser, R. M.
(1995) Learning second language grammar rules: An experiment with a miniature linguistic system. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 17(3), 379–410. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dixon, L. Q., Zhao, J., Shin, J.-Y., Wu, S., Su, J.-H., Burgess-Brigham, R., Gezer, M. U., & Snow, C.
(2012) What we know about second language acquisition: A synthesis from four perspectives. Review of Educational Research, 82 (1), 5–60. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Doughty, C. J.
(2003) Instructed SLA: Constraints, compensation, and enhancement. In C. J. Doughty & M. H. Long (Eds.), The handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 256–310). Blackwell Publishing Ltd. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dörnyei, Z.
(2009) The psychology of second language acquisiton, Oxford, Oxford University press, 131–177.Google Scholar
Ellis, N.
(2009) Optimizing the input: Frequency and sampling in usage-based and form-focused learning. In M. H. Long & C. J. Doughty (Eds.), The handbook of language teaching (pp. 139–158). Wiley-Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2015) Implicit AND explicit language learning- Their dynamic interface and complexity. In Rebuschat (ed.) Studies in Bilingualism (SiBil), vol. 48. (Implicit and Explicit Learning of Languages) (pp.3–23). John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ellis, N. & Collins, L.
(2009) Input and second language acquisition: The roles of frequency, form, and function. Introduction to the special issue. The Modern Language Journal (Boulder, Colo.), 93 (3), 329–335. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ellis, R., & Loewen, S.
(2007) Confirming the operational definitions of explicit and implicit knowledge in ellis (2005): Responding to Isemonger. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 29 (1), 119–126. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ellis, R., & Shintani, N.
(2014) Exploring language pedagogy through second language acquisition research. Routledge.Google Scholar
Elvin, J. & Escudero, P.
(2019) Cross-linguistic influence in second language speech: Implications for learning and teaching. In: Cross-Linguistic Influence: From Empirical Evidence to Classroom Practice (pp. 1–20). Springer International Publishing. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Field, J.
(2008) Listening in the language classroom. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Gass, S. M.
(1997) Input, interaction, and the second language learner. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Godfroid, A.
(2015) The effects of implicit instruction on implicit and explicit knowledge development. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, vol. 38, 177–215. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goo, J., Granena, G., Yilmaz, Y., & Novella, M.
(2015) Implicit and explicit instruction in L2 learning: Norris & Ortega (2000) revisited and updated. In P. Rebuschat (ed.), Studies in Bilingualism (Vol. 481, pp. 443–482). John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hassall, T.
(2015) Individual variation in L2 study-abroad outcomes: A case study from Indonesian pragmatics. Multilingua, 34 (1), 33–59. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hernández, T. A.
(2008) The effect of explicit instruction and input flood on students’ use of Spanish discourse markers on a simulated oral proficiency interview. Hispania, 91 (3), 665–675. [URL]
(2011) Re-examining the role of explicit instruction and input flood on the acquisition of Spanish discourse markers. Language Teaching Research, 15 (2), 159–182. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Housen, A. & Pierrard, M.
(2005) Investigations in instructed second language acquisition. In Investigations in instructed second language acquisition (vol. 251). Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hulstijn, J. H., & de Graaff, R.
(1994) Under what conditions does explicit knowledge of a second language facilitate the acquisition of implicit knowledge? A research proposal. AILA Review, vol. 11, 97–112Google Scholar
Hulstijn, J. H.
(1995) Not all grammar rules are equal: giving grammar instruction its proper place in foreign language teaching. In R. Schmidt (Ed.). Attention and awareness in foreign language learning (pp. 359–386). (Technical report; No. 9). Second Language Teaching & Curriculum Center, University of Hawaii at Manoa.Google Scholar
Kamiya, N.
(2018) Proactive Versus Reactive Focus on Form. In J. I. Liontas, T. International Association, & M. Delli Carpini (ed.), The TESOL Encyclopedia of English Language Teaching (pp. 1–6). John Wiley & Sons, Inc. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kang, E. Y., Sok, S., & Han, Z.
(2019) Thirty-five years of ISLA on form-focused instruction: A meta-analysis. Language Teaching Research, 23 (4), 428–453. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Keresztes, L.
(1999) A practical Hungarian grammar. Debreceni Nyári Egyetem.Google Scholar
Korchmáros, V. M.
(2006) Hungarian: Step by step. Hungarian grammar-not only for Hungarians. Hungarian & Central-European International Studies Center-University of Szeged.Google Scholar
Lichtman, K.
(2016) Age and learning environment: Are children implicit second language learners? Journal of Child Language, 43 (3), 707–730. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2021) What about fluency? Implicit vs. explicit training affects artificial mini-language production. Applied Linguistics, 42 (4), 668–691. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lichtman, K., & VanPatten, B.
(2021) Was Krashen right? Forty years later. Foreign Language Annals, 54 (2), 283–305. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lightbown, P., & Spada, N.
(2021) How languages are learned (Fifth edition). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
McKinley, J., & Rose, H.
(Eds.) (2019) The Routledge handbook of research methods in applied linguistics (1st ed.). Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
McManus, K.
(2022) Crosslinguistic influence and second language learning. Routledge.Google Scholar
Morgan-Short, K., Sanz, C., Steinhauer, K., & Ullman, M. T.
(2010) Second language acquisition of gender agreement in explicit and implicit training conditions: An event-related potential study. Language Learning, 60 (1), 154–193. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Muñoz, C.
(ed.) (2006) Age and the rate of foreign language learning. Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Norris, J. M., Davis, J. McE, & Timpe, V.
(2017) Second language educational experiences for adult learners. New York, NY: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Norris, J. M., & Ortega, L.
(2000) Effectiveness of L2 instruction: A research synthesis and quantitative meta-analysis. Language Learning, 50 (3), 417–528. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pienemann, M.
(1988) Determining the influence of instruction on L2 speech processing. AILA Review, vol.5/1, 40–72. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Piggott, L.
(2019) First meaning then form. A longitudinal study on the effects of delaying and reducing form-focused instruction for young adolescent EFL learners. LOT, Netherlands Graduate School.Google Scholar
Plonsky, L., Marsden, E., Crowther, D., Gass, S. & Spinner, P.
(2020) A methodological synthesis and meta-analysis of judgment tasks in second language research. Second Language Research, 36 (4), 583–621. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rashtichi, M., & Yousefi, L. M.
(2016) Reading input flooding and listening input flooding: Do they affect Iranian EFL learners’ grammar knowledge. International Journal of Humanities and Cultural Studies, issue 2016, 2389–2398.Google Scholar
Rebuschat, P.
(2015) Implicit and explicit learning of languages. John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Richardson, J. T. E.
(2011) Eta squared and partial eta squared as measures of effect size in educational research. Educational Research Review, 6 (2), 135–147. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ringbom, H. & Jarvis, S.
(2009) Chapter 7. The importance of cross-linguistic similarity in foreign language learning. In Long, M. H., & Doughty, C. J. (2011), The handbook of language teaching. Wiley-Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Robinson, P.
(Ed.) (2013) The Routledge encyclopedia of second language acquisition. Routledge.Google Scholar
Rogers, J. & Révész, A.
(2019) Experimental and quasi-experimental designs. In The Routledge Handbook of Research Methods in Applied Linguistics (1st ed., pp. 133–143). Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rousse-Malpat, A., Koote, L., Steinkrauss, R., & Verspoor, M.
(2021)  Parlez-vous francais? Effects of structure-based versus dynamic-usage-based approaches on oral proficiency. Language Teaching Research, 136216882110402. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rousse-Malpat, A., & Verspoor, M.
(2012) Measuring effectiveness in Focus on Form versus Focus on Meaning. Dutch Journal of Applied Linguistics, 1 (2), 263–276. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2018) Foreign language instruction from a dynamic usage-based (DUB) perspective. In Tyler, A. E., Ortega, L., Uno, M., & Park, H. I. (Eds.). Usage-inspired L2 Instruction: Researched pedagogy (Vol. 491, pp. 55–73). John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rulik, I.
(2009) Hibaelemzés köztes nyelvi keretben. Teaching Hungarian as L2, vol.1, 106–136. [URL]
Sanz, C., & Morgan-Short, K.
(2004) Positive evidence versus explicit rule presentation and explicit negative feedback: A computer-assisted study. Language Learning, 54(1), 35–78. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sato, M. & Loewen, S.
(2019) Chapter 3. Methodological strengths, challenges, and joys of classroom-based quasi-experimental research: Metacognitive instruction and corrective feedback. In R. M. DeKeyser & G. Prieto Botana (Eds.), Language Learning & Language Teaching (Vol. 521, pp. 31–54). John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Scheffler, P.
(2011) Grammar and meaning in early adult foreign language instruction. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 21 (2), 183–201. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schmidt, R.
(Ed.) (1998) Attention and awareness in foreign language learning (Nachdr.). Second Language Teaching & Curriculum Center.Google Scholar
Schulz, R.
(2001) Cultural differences in student and teacher perceptions concerning the role of grammar instruction and corrective feedback: USA-Colombia. The Modern Language Journal (Boulder, Colo.), 85 (2), 244–258. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schurz, A., & Coumel, M.
(2020) Grammar teaching in ELT: A cross-national comparison of teacher-reported practices. Language Teaching Research, 136216882096413. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Spada, N.
(2015) SLA research and L2 pedagogy: Misapplications and questions of relevance. Language Teaching, 48 (1), 69–81. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Spada, N., & Tomita, Y.
(2010) Interactions between type of instruction and type of language feature: a meta-analysis. Language Learning, vol. 60, 263–308. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tilma, C., & de Bot, K.
(2014) The dynamics of foreign versus second language development in Finnish writing. Jÿvaskyla University Printing House.Google Scholar
Vandergrift, L., & Goh, C. C. M.
(2011) Teaching and Learning Second Language Listening: Metacognition in Action (1st ed.). Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Walk, A. M. M., & Conway, C. M.
(2015) Implicit statistical learning and language acquisition. Experience-dependent constraints on learning. In Rebuschat (ed.) Studies in Bilingualism (SiBil), vol. 48. (Implicit and Explicit Learning of Languages) (pp.191–212). John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI logo [URL]